Apple Should Listen to Sony

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Digital Skunk, Oct 24, 2007.

  1. Digital Skunk macrumors 604

    Digital Skunk

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Location:
    In my imagination
    #1
    Check this machine out

    I know Apple can do it and better. Even if it has to cost $2500 starting price I am sure certain people will buy it. Kinda makes me want to get one for me and my girl but it runs Windows... yuck! :mad:

    Thoughts.... real thoughts, no Lenovo praising or Dell 1330 worshipping because I have already torn those machines to shreds.
     
  2. Pressure macrumors 68040

    Pressure

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    #2
    Link is not working properly for me (using Safari).

    Update: Weird, now it works :)
     
  3. Digital Skunk thread starter macrumors 604

    Digital Skunk

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Location:
    In my imagination
    #3
    Sorry... my first time using html for that. It should work now.
     
  4. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #4
    That's quite a well equipped UP. The style is not Apple's but the goods are all there.
     
  5. ~J~ macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the sun
    #5
    Just go to www.sonystyle.com and look it up there.

    Ok, the design is not bad... except the "bar" across the bottom of the screen where the power button resides. Looks like a separate part of the notebook. But seriously, for $2100, you get:
    -Intel C2D 1.06GHz processor (1.06?? - c'mon...)
    -Long battery life (whats long? 2.5hrs? 3hrs?)

    And I have a problem paying $2100 for an 11.1" display... i can get a nice MB w/a 13" display for that... and that runs OSX (Leopard!), not vista business (yuk!). And the line goes up to $4000... and you still only hit a 1.2GHz processor... seriously?? C'mon Sony... who's gonna pay that for such a slow device? just because someone wants a smaller form factor doesnt mean they are willing to pay MORE for LESS processing power. Nice idea... but :apple: would do so much better at making a smaller laptop.

    EDIT: I just noticed that the CR series has a "pulsing light on the front to let you know when the laptop is sleeping"... look familiar???
     
  6. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #6
    You pay for the size and weight (or lack thereof). 2.4lbs is quite good. I don't think its overpriced given its contraints. I doubt :apple: could improve on the specs too much. They have to work with what they are given, just like Sony.
     
  7. scaredpoet macrumors 604

    scaredpoet

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    #7
    This would be a good top-tier MacBook Pro. Note the $3k price tag. You're not going to see this on the MB level for a good while yet.


    That said, I've bought computers from Sony before. Now I realize what a mistake that can be. :(
     
  8. Adokimus macrumors 6502a

    Adokimus

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #8
    That laptop's been out for quite awhile now, even longer in Japan. And the topic has been heavily discussed. Check this thread:

    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=4217337#post4217337


    As far as tearing Lenovo and Dell to shreds, I've read your "tearing" and it was mostly biased and unfounded.

    Peace,

    Ado
     
  9. Digital Skunk thread starter macrumors 604

    Digital Skunk

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Location:
    In my imagination
    #9
    The Windows OS is what really makes it not worth the cash. But a lot of users, especially the ones with 12" PowerBooks, probably won't mind paying Apple $2000 for an 11.1" MacBook Pro with the same specs running Mac OS X. Paying $4000 is a bit much, especially since you can't get higher than a 1.2GHz processor.

    I am sure the site said that battery life was from 4 --> 7 hours.
     
  10. Digital Skunk thread starter macrumors 604

    Digital Skunk

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Location:
    In my imagination
    #10
    You don't have to post the threads where things have already been talked about. It gets rather annoying at times especially since it's not just about the topic, it's about the specs on the laptop. I don't see you in the four or five MacBook Pro update thread either, so you're not doing your job of regulating that very well.

    Most of my shred tearing happens between here and Thinksecret and it's by no way unfounded or biased much like your rather rude post, stop stalking me.
     
  11. ~J~ macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the sun
    #11
    I'm sure the increased drain in battery from a higher speed processor would still be quite acceptable... i mean the thing only has an 11" screen... my MBP w/a 15.4" & 2.33GHz C2D processor still gets 3hrs of battery (on avg.)... imagine what an 11" MBP w/a 2.1GHz C2D would be like! Apple could do awesome with a device like this... and @ $4k for the specs you get, Apple could easily under-cut Sony's price with a better spec system. this could be a great entry for Apple...
     
  12. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #12
    Not in a 2.4lb UP it won't. This is not your average notebook. The top model gets up to 12.5 hours of battery life.
     
  13. ~J~ macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the sun
    #13
    My point was that you would still get very acceptable battery life with a faster, more powerful processor. It would still be worth putting newer intel chips in there. even if the batter life went down to 10hrs, i would rather have more power. besides... typically, you spend the same amount of time anyway - if you have less power, more battery life - you wait longer for apps to open, etc. so some of that extra battery life is used during that - not all. if you have a faster processor, but less battery time, you get more done in that time. theoretically, you could get almost the same amount of work done. i was just saying i would rather not wait and have the faster system. i know, playing a movie, you would rather have the battery life (on a plane). chances are, if you are on a plane ride that long, you have access to a power outlet.
     
  14. Digital Skunk thread starter macrumors 604

    Digital Skunk

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Location:
    In my imagination
    #14
    I see what you are saying and it makes sense, but I would still go with the lower clocked CPU for price if anything. Getting the components that small and still being able to cool them would be a rather expensive if not impossible task. That's another reason why they may go with lower clocked CPUs, because of heat.

    That's the only reason to pay $3000 for that machine and the best reason to go UP. Could you imagine going all day with your machine on normal use? Running a slower processor and using flash based HDDs would save enough energy to run all day, and I don't think anyone is really going to try to do anything more than word processing, web surfing, blogging, etc on a machine with an 11.1 screen.

    I would rather Apple make a machine with similar specs, but in a body that's a little thicker and heavier so they could lower the price. I would love to see an 11.1" MacBook Pro running a 1.6 GHz processor dual core, 1GB ram, integrated graphics, and 60GB or so HDD for ~$1700 base. Then give the users a plethora of BTO options that they'd wants. Swap out the HDD for flash based, up the processor, maybe add a dedicated graphics card. It would get expensive at that point but if the user wants to pay $4000, for the fastest Mac OS X running UP notebook ever than so be it.
     
  15. Adokimus macrumors 6502a

    Adokimus

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #15
    Moderators actually do encourage people to search for information before posting and to close out repetitive threads. In reference to the persistant "Matte vs. Glossy" question, one moderator has noted:

    And if you had actually read my link, instead of simply lashing back at me within 2 minutes of my post, you would have seen that the specs of that exact laptop have been discussed in detail. Unlike you, I actually did read, and I stand by what I said about your "tearing," even though your wording and tone implies a need to pat your own ego. Please take your insecurities elsewhere.

    -Ado
     
  16. d_saum macrumors 6502

    d_saum

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Location:
    NC
    #16
    Did you miss the part where it said 4.5 to 8.5 hours of battery life?

    I dont like the laptop much but damn..... 8.5 would be awesome!
     
  17. Digital Skunk thread starter macrumors 604

    Digital Skunk

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Location:
    In my imagination
    #17
    I did, and i have been in many threads that haven't been closed down like the MacBook Pro yellowing issue, the MacPro lack of good GFXs card issues, the iMac screen issue, and the current threads going on about the MBP update. I am sure there are many many more threads, so why comment about this one like it's nothing new.

    I read the link and I know the machine wasn't new before I made the post, but as usual threads wind down into mindless debates instead of intelligent discussion fast, as that thread did. People just passing their usual one liners and such.

    I know what the Mods encourage, I read the manual man, and I am not lashing out at you or anyone. But your first comment wasn't very respectable either, and you should watch how you say things if you don't want someone to come at you with a civil attitude and make you feel like a jerk. Unfounded and biased isn't something you would want to end your statement with if you didn't want a negative reply.
     
  18. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #18
    It is a new procesor. Its a low voltage Core 2 Duo. Same amount of time to surf and type emails and reports which is what most UPs will be doing.
     
  19. ~J~ macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the sun
    #19
    I did, actually. and I agree, 8.5hrs would be awesome... but i would still rather run OSX on it...
     
  20. gnasher729 macrumors P6

    gnasher729

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    #20
    The machine linked to runs at 1.2 GHz, has a 1368x768 screen, weighs 2.5 pounds, up to 8.5 hour battery life, and costs $2999. I'd call this ridiculously overpriced.
     
  21. ~J~ macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the sun
    #21
    Ok... fair point guys... considering its design for the purposes of email, web surfing & blogging... it would be awesome. i just prefer to be able to do more with my laptop... i run final cut on my MBP! how great is that?! but i do understand that not everyone needs that... but at the same time, if all you want is a mobile system for email & web... are you really going to pay $2-3k for it??? I know its light... but im not sure thats a worthy trade off for the hefty price... I'd have a MB for email & web long before spending that kinda money on a vista run machine...
     
  22. macenforcer macrumors 65816

    macenforcer

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Location:
    Colorado
    #22
    Looks like you proved my point.
     
  23. Digital Skunk thread starter macrumors 604

    Digital Skunk

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Location:
    In my imagination
    #23
    That's really the main purpose for UP machines. I can barely tolerate running FCP on my 15" MBP let alone an 11.1" YUCK! But there are plenty of users viewing web pages, movies, and word processors on machines with even smaller screens.... like the iPhone.

    My girlfriend has been my poster child for UP machines... all she want to do is some low processor intensive stuff. Maybe edit some photos in iPhoto for her website at the most. And when she saw this machine at CompUSA a few months back, she almost cried, because it was the perfect size, the perfect price (at $2000 low end), and the keyboard was rather comfortable. The only problem... WINDOWS!

    Macenforcer, sorry, I wrote that post before I read the other one you made. I still don't think Lenovo, like the Dell 1330 offers anything substantially better than Apple's lineup, without sacrificing one of their main features. The T4x's modular drive system would suit the MBP fine and would only sacrifice tenth of an inch. The main benefit from the 1330 is the price that you pay for the advanced features that aren't found in the MacBook, but once you actually add what people are begging for the price goes beyond $1800, and may still be missing some specs that Apple machines have. And the 1330 isn't really an UP.
     

Share This Page